Somebody Calls this Christian?
- Thread starter Woody
- Start date
Woody said:
What is respectable? Something of vitue and moral? What is moral? Philosophy teaches a few different systems of ethics. My favorite is in the spirit of my country, Utilitarianism. One problem I have with the system is that it defines morality as what is best for all parties involved. The problem I have is that it is relative to what an individual or group says is best. Morals are relative to the individual or group, but a group is made of individuals. Does that sound like a great way to determine morality?
Yorda said:
Well, in America you can do whatever you want as long as you don't get caught!
And if you get caught, make sure the majority of people agree with you, then a lobbying group will support you. A good lawyer never hurt anyone either!Viva las vegas!
S/G says: You are allowed not to respect anyone you wish, Woody, but our government is not.
Woody says: I think gays are really looking for social respect, and they believe a legal marriage certificate will make them respectable. I really consider it (gay marriage) no different than common law marriage(male/female cohabitation). Maybe they can have their marriage, and those of us that married with religious vows can come up with a different word that describes our union -- like "holy matrimony" or "holy union." I never liked common law "marriage" anyway, I think it's cheap. So I'm ready to abandon the word "marriage" for my relationship, and use a better word that can't be cheapened.
Also, I wouldn't expect a huge rush to the alter if gays are allowed to marry in the U.S.
Woody says: I think gays are really looking for social respect, and they believe a legal marriage certificate will make them respectable. I really consider it (gay marriage) no different than common law marriage(male/female cohabitation). Maybe they can have their marriage, and those of us that married with religious vows can come up with a different word that describes our union -- like "holy matrimony" or "holy union." I never liked common law "marriage" anyway, I think it's cheap. So I'm ready to abandon the word "marriage" for my relationship, and use a better word that can't be cheapened.
Also, I wouldn't expect a huge rush to the alter if gays are allowed to marry in the U.S.
I think we're forgetting the topic of the thread, which is: Sombody Calls this Christian?
I think we're missing the real point of Woody's dismissal of the homosexual population, which is that its hypocritical stand is inconsistent with the teachings of Christ. Modern, fundamentalist christians like Woody all but ignore many biblical taboos and faux pas that Christ spends far more time on than homosexuality. Indeed, there is even an acceptance by Jesus that homosexuality exists when he says something to the effect of, "two men will be in bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left." Jesus recognizes that even among these men, one can achieve salvation.
A true christian doesn't pass judgement against others in the manner that Woody has in this thread, "[h]e that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."
If it is Christian to attack homosexuality with such vigor, yet ignore the manner with which we treat each other as fellow humans to the degree that many, if not most, modern Christians do, then I wonder why Jesus didn't spend more time commenting on sexual behavior. Other than telling a woman who was guilty of adultery to "sin no more," did Jesus ever discuss homosexual behavior? Did he even discuss sexuality at all?
If Jesus was an actual figure in history, perhaps he simply didn't feel that being gay was all that significant. Perhaps he was more concerned with the manner in which people treated each other and their relationship with god.
Woody began this thread by pointing out the various cult figures in christian history and argued their validity as "true christians." While I can certainly agree with him that these figures (as well as many cult figures today) professed to be christian, they did not live up to the teachings of Christ. Taking an etic perspective, we can define these figures (Jim Jones, Marshall Applewhite, Robert Tilton, David Koresh, et al) as Christian cult leaders because they expressed their beliefs in Jesus Christ as the Savior and Messiah.
However, from an emic perspective, I can agree that they are not representative of what Jesus Christ attempted to teach. But then, can we not apply that same perspective on fundamentalists like Woody, who distort biblical passage to fit their agenda? Who hypocritically pick and choose, buffet style, the scriptures that will apply to them according to what their contemporary goals and objectives are?
I think we're missing the real point of Woody's dismissal of the homosexual population, which is that its hypocritical stand is inconsistent with the teachings of Christ. Modern, fundamentalist christians like Woody all but ignore many biblical taboos and faux pas that Christ spends far more time on than homosexuality. Indeed, there is even an acceptance by Jesus that homosexuality exists when he says something to the effect of, "two men will be in bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left." Jesus recognizes that even among these men, one can achieve salvation.
A true christian doesn't pass judgement against others in the manner that Woody has in this thread, "[h]e that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."
If it is Christian to attack homosexuality with such vigor, yet ignore the manner with which we treat each other as fellow humans to the degree that many, if not most, modern Christians do, then I wonder why Jesus didn't spend more time commenting on sexual behavior. Other than telling a woman who was guilty of adultery to "sin no more," did Jesus ever discuss homosexual behavior? Did he even discuss sexuality at all?
If Jesus was an actual figure in history, perhaps he simply didn't feel that being gay was all that significant. Perhaps he was more concerned with the manner in which people treated each other and their relationship with god.
Woody began this thread by pointing out the various cult figures in christian history and argued their validity as "true christians." While I can certainly agree with him that these figures (as well as many cult figures today) professed to be christian, they did not live up to the teachings of Christ. Taking an etic perspective, we can define these figures (Jim Jones, Marshall Applewhite, Robert Tilton, David Koresh, et al) as Christian cult leaders because they expressed their beliefs in Jesus Christ as the Savior and Messiah.
However, from an emic perspective, I can agree that they are not representative of what Jesus Christ attempted to teach. But then, can we not apply that same perspective on fundamentalists like Woody, who distort biblical passage to fit their agenda? Who hypocritically pick and choose, buffet style, the scriptures that will apply to them according to what their contemporary goals and objectives are?
S/W: "two men will be in bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left."
Woody says: That doesn't mean they are having sex, Skinwalker. If they are having sex, then it is only God's grace that allows one of them to be taken.
Again, here's what Bible says since you apparantly missed it the first time around:
I Corinthians 6:9:
Stop deceiving us Skinwalker. Deception is the Devil's job. Don't do the devil's job for him as the deceiver. He is also called the accuser of the brethren. You fit right in with him. The devil also misquoted the bible in the 40 day temptation of Jesus. Yep, you and Mr. D got a good thing going.
There are several New Testament verses that make it clear that homosexuality is wrong and it is no different then any other proclivity.
So what do you want me to do, dismiss the whole bible I believe in like you and Mr. D have done, so I can accept your point of view?
The Bible Also says, people like you that approve of this lifestyle deserve to go to hell, may I quote Romans chapter 1:
Like I say, Skinwalker, you make a good satanist. You can't win your argument with a bible. So you don't think "fisting" and "rimming" are indecent acts, do you. You actually approve of this behavior? Yuck!
Woody says: That doesn't mean they are having sex, Skinwalker. If they are having sex, then it is only God's grace that allows one of them to be taken.
Again, here's what Bible says since you apparantly missed it the first time around:
I Corinthians 6:9:
Stop deceiving us Skinwalker. Deception is the Devil's job. Don't do the devil's job for him as the deceiver. He is also called the accuser of the brethren. You fit right in with him. The devil also misquoted the bible in the 40 day temptation of Jesus. Yep, you and Mr. D got a good thing going.
There are several New Testament verses that make it clear that homosexuality is wrong and it is no different then any other proclivity.
So what do you want me to do, dismiss the whole bible I believe in like you and Mr. D have done, so I can accept your point of view?
The Bible Also says, people like you that approve of this lifestyle deserve to go to hell, may I quote Romans chapter 1:
Like I say, Skinwalker, you make a good satanist. You can't win your argument with a bible. So you don't think "fisting" and "rimming" are indecent acts, do you. You actually approve of this behavior? Yuck!
Last edited:
Your last sentence is called Ad Hominem Tu Quoque.
You're quick to quote Corinthians, but tell us: where did Jesus speak about the evils of homosexuality?
Where is it consistent with Christianity to single out a very small minority population and all but ignore the evils and sins in your own back yard? Why not fix all the sinning within the so-called Christian community first? I'm also curious why you make the assumption that deviant sexual acts exist only or even mostly among homosexuals. Same-sex relationships exist in which sex isn't even that frequent, it is their love for each other that keeps them together.
But I can see that you aren't interested in keeping this thread on-topic, but rather using it to push the bigotted agenda of the fundamentalist christian -which, ironically, calls to question your topic again: "Somebody calls this Christian?"
You're quick to quote Corinthians, but tell us: where did Jesus speak about the evils of homosexuality?
Where is it consistent with Christianity to single out a very small minority population and all but ignore the evils and sins in your own back yard? Why not fix all the sinning within the so-called Christian community first? I'm also curious why you make the assumption that deviant sexual acts exist only or even mostly among homosexuals. Same-sex relationships exist in which sex isn't even that frequent, it is their love for each other that keeps them together.
But I can see that you aren't interested in keeping this thread on-topic, but rather using it to push the bigotted agenda of the fundamentalist christian -which, ironically, calls to question your topic again: "Somebody calls this Christian?"
"...Consequently, as of December 31, 2003, our research
identified a total of 1,138 federal statutory provisions classified to
the United States Code in which marital status is a factor in
determining or receiving benefits, rights, and privileges."
http://www.gao.gov/atext/d04353r.txt
So that's 1,138 benefits of a civil marriage.
SW said: You're quick to quote Corinthians, but tell us: where did Jesus speak about the evils of homosexuality?
Woody says: Jesus did not come to the world to condemn the world but that the world might be saved. Jesus will preside at the great white throne judgement where sinners will be condemned after they die.
S/W says: Where is it consistent with Christianity to single out a very small minority population and all but ignore the evils and sins in your own back yard? Why not fix all the sinning within the so-called Christian community first?
Woody says: I already told you one time that gay sex is right in there with the rest of the sins, there is no difference. Would you like to discuss cohabitation between heterosexuals? It's the same thing. So is adultery. Pick your subject instead of coming back to gays all the time. That seems to be all you want to talk about. I'm opposed to cohabs too. Can we please talk about something besides gays? Please? I'm getting tired of it myself.
S/W: But I can see that you aren't interested in keeping this thread on-topic, but rather using it to push the bigotted agenda of the fundamentalist christian -which, ironically, calls to question your topic again: "Somebody calls this Christian?"
Woody: Please do get the subject on topic. What you wanna talk about besides homosexual hate-mongering, is that all you ever think about?
Woody says: Jesus did not come to the world to condemn the world but that the world might be saved. Jesus will preside at the great white throne judgement where sinners will be condemned after they die.
S/W says: Where is it consistent with Christianity to single out a very small minority population and all but ignore the evils and sins in your own back yard? Why not fix all the sinning within the so-called Christian community first?
Woody says: I already told you one time that gay sex is right in there with the rest of the sins, there is no difference. Would you like to discuss cohabitation between heterosexuals? It's the same thing. So is adultery. Pick your subject instead of coming back to gays all the time. That seems to be all you want to talk about. I'm opposed to cohabs too. Can we please talk about something besides gays? Please? I'm getting tired of it myself.
S/W: But I can see that you aren't interested in keeping this thread on-topic, but rather using it to push the bigotted agenda of the fundamentalist christian -which, ironically, calls to question your topic again: "Somebody calls this Christian?"
Woody: Please do get the subject on topic. What you wanna talk about besides homosexual hate-mongering, is that all you ever think about?
S/L says: Did you honestly expect anything different?
Woody says: Snakelord is back! The wife says get lost!
What happened to the sciforums for the last month or so?
I must admit I really enjoyed the time off. I got a new engineer job, and I like it a bunch.
So tell me snaklord, when will you go to the first church service in your life? :bugeye:
Woody says: Snakelord is back! The wife says get lost!
What happened to the sciforums for the last month or so?
I must admit I really enjoyed the time off. I got a new engineer job, and I like it a bunch.
So tell me snaklord, when will you go to the first church service in your life? :bugeye:
Last edited:
Woody,
why don't you want to talk about homosexual hate-mongering? It seems like as good a problem as any to talk about. Kind of like Christians being afraid of anything they can't accept. You may not like hearing it, but Christians can be some of the most judgemental and arrogant fools in the universe. "Ooh, that's gross, I don't want to talk about it, push it away." Christians, I swear to God, can be some of the most narrowminded idiots I've ever known. (I include myself in that judgement too, because I was conditioned from an early age to think just like a Christian). In fact, I WAS a Christian for about 30 years.
Anyway, I'll step down off my soapbox now. This is giving me a headache!
CT3000
why don't you want to talk about homosexual hate-mongering? It seems like as good a problem as any to talk about. Kind of like Christians being afraid of anything they can't accept. You may not like hearing it, but Christians can be some of the most judgemental and arrogant fools in the universe. "Ooh, that's gross, I don't want to talk about it, push it away." Christians, I swear to God, can be some of the most narrowminded idiots I've ever known. (I include myself in that judgement too, because I was conditioned from an early age to think just like a Christian). In fact, I WAS a Christian for about 30 years.
Anyway, I'll step down off my soapbox now. This is giving me a headache!
CT3000
For me, it's just that I HATE to see any kind of discrimination or racism going on, other than my own discrimination against discriminators or racists of course.
Way to dodge the facts, can't say I'm surprised.Woody said:S/G: So that's 1,138 benefits of a civil marriage.
Woody: Could you please point out a few benefits that matter, I didn't know I was missing out. Is child support and alimony included?
Tell your wife she's nothing but a woman, and the bible has clearly informed me that women and their views/opinions ain't worth shit. Tell her to go cook me some food and speak only when I give her permission to.
It was down.
That's really fascinating.
Why would I go to church? If I really want to look at several hundred dicks I'll just put a porn film on.
S/L says: Why would I go to church?
Woody: Because you said you wanted to see God. Well, maybe not much. You also said you majored in religious education -- it's odd that you never even attended a service, like real odd.
S/L: Tell your wife she's nothing but a woman, and the bible has clearly informed me that women and their views/opinions ain't worth shit. Tell her to go cook me some food and speak only when I give her permission to.
Woody: The wife says you're a kook, and I shouldn't waste my time with you.
Woody: Because you said you wanted to see God. Well, maybe not much. You also said you majored in religious education -- it's odd that you never even attended a service, like real odd.
S/L: Tell your wife she's nothing but a woman, and the bible has clearly informed me that women and their views/opinions ain't worth shit. Tell her to go cook me some food and speak only when I give her permission to.
Woody: The wife says you're a kook, and I shouldn't waste my time with you.
Last edited: